3.6 million year old bipedalism at Laetoli is a geological hoax


4/04/20  

Any educated person today can realize that religions are actually based on misunderstandings, delusions, and hoaxes. Likewise, any geologist with experience in isotopic dating of rocks can read the published literature on Laetoli and realize that the 3.6 my age of the footprints is actually a geological hoax.

 

Let's start with religion. The basis for Christianity is a hoax. Jesus never performed those miracles, and his body never went up into the clouds after he died. But educated people (even university history professors who might be atheists) do not want to discuss these obvious problems, and expose that hoax, which is the basis for such an important religion. They don't want to upset the status quo. 

 

The basis for the Mormon Church is more recent, from 1823. Joseph Smith never found any "Golden Plates" on a hill near his home. He said those plates had a mystical text that he translated into the Book of Mormon, before the angel Moroni took the Golden Plates away. But educated Mormons and history professors do not want to discuss those obvious problems, and expose that hoax, which is the basis for such a powerful religion. They don't want to upset the status quo.

 

In science, the main basis for 3.6 million year old bipedalism is a geological hoax. The rocks with footprints at Laetoli were interpreted to have been fresh volcanic ash. But the geological descriptions that were published make it very clear that they were actually wet lake muds, and not fresh volcanic ash. Some of the mineral grains in those lake muds are 3.6 my old, as the isotopic dating showed. But the muds themselves, and the footprints, are probably less than 1 my old.

 

Those geological descriptions and incorrect 3.6 my interpretations could never have been published in a peer-reviewed geological journal. No impartial geologist would accept them. They were published in academic books, that were controlled by the scientific team that wrote and edited the books. Only a few geologists have bothered to read those books and are aware of that shabby geological work, and if they do know about it, they do not want to upset the status quo.

 

You can read some of the details of the Laetoli hoax in the paper that I published here. I had to be careful in that paper, and not use the word "hoax" for Laetoli.

 

I have read much more about Laetoli and other work in East Africa since I wrote that paper. There is a properly published scientific paper from Engare Sero that shows exactly how footprint-bearing sedimentary rocks are geologically studied, described and dated. If the Laetoli beds were ever properly studied and described, the mineral dates would be reinterpreted in the proper way.

 

If someone incorrectly claimed that the lake sediments at Engare Sero were fresh volcanic deposits, they would interpret the mineral dates in the same way that the Laetoli mineral dates were interpreted. They would incorrectly claim that the Engare Sero footprints, which are less than 20,000 years old, were many millions of years old.

 

I am a geologist who is willing to upset the status quo, and I happen to have much personal experience in isotopic dating. I plan to write a scientific paper on Laetoli. But it may be impossible to find any scientific journal editor or peer-review scientists that would want to deal with it. They will not want to upset the status quo.

Join AAT@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.